THE fight in federal appeals court over Washington state's
primary-election system is polarized around two principles. One argues
for wider voter choice through a "top-two" primary, while the other
pulls for the right of free association by way of a Montana-style
system of partisan ballots.

These two important elements of our democratic experience — choice and
free association — need not be mutually exclusive. Nor can we let this
false dichotomy distract us from the challenges facing Washington
elections.

Just a small modification of the top-two system would alleviate the
concerns of all parties involved. The change, to a ranked-choice
ballot, would remove the constitutional problems created by Initiative
872, now before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and ultimately
build a quality democratic system that would invite increased
participation.

This past September, with a closed primary system in place, 63 percent
of Washington voters did not participate. Too many citizens hold our
democratic structures in low esteem. Meanwhile, the majority of races
for public office are uncontested or uncompetitive. A poorly received
primary-election model only makes matters worse.

Modifying the I-872 top-two primary system with a ranked-choice ballot
would narrow the field to two candidates, who, regardless of party
affiliation, would then advance to the general election. The main
departure would be that each voter would rank the candidates for office
in his or her order of preference, from the first choice down through
as many candidates as the voter chooses to rank, or as many as the
rules permit. It's as easy as 1-2-3.

Votes would be counted in a series of rounds. Each round would
eliminate the candidate with the fewest votes and redistribute ballots
to those voters' next choices.

This process of elimination and redistribution is repeated in
subsequent rounds and the top-two-ranked candidates advance to the
general election.

Political parties would nominate their own candidates in a pre-primary
convention, preserving their right of free association. In fact, they
could nominate multiple candidates for a position, thus promulgating
the wider-choice benefits of I-872. Assured that votes would converge
on the most-popular candidates, parties would have great incentive to
put up a diverse field of qualified candidates from within their ranks
in order to bring a wider share of their supporters to the polls.

While partisan voters could rank their own candidates faithfully,
independent voters who do not wish to vote along any party line would
be able to select candidates from a larger, mixed pool, thus preserving
the wider choices of I-872.

So, there you have it — more voter choice and the preservation of free association, working in harmony instead of clashing.

A ranked-choice primary promises many more benefits. In San Francisco,
where ranked-choice voting is used, negative campaigning was greatly
reduced. In fact, rival candidates actually endorsed each other, vying
to be the second choice of their opponents' supporters.

Why not utilize this smart and efficient system to give Washington voters better value and to improve turnout?

It's a system that can be built on. In the future, we could choose to
fold the primary into a single, efficient, ranked-choice general
election, shortening the campaign season and saving tax dollars.

Ultimately, we might consider proportional voting — a variation of
ranked choice — making our legislative races much more competitive.

Ranked ballots have held up to constitutional scrutiny by meeting
equal-protection requirements. Our own state Supreme Court has upheld
ranking candidates for Washington primary elections.

After the system was approved by voters, the political establishment in
San Francisco tried hard to slow the implementation of ranked ballots.
Defenders of the status quo failed and ranked-choice voting now stands
unchallenged because of its solid case law.

Washingtonians want meaningful participation. Adding a ranked-choice
component to our primary elections is just the start toward moving on
to a more-functional, competitive democracy that is a model for the
rest of the nation.

Krist Novoselic was the bass player for Nirvana and one of the
group's co-founders, along with the late Kurt Cobain. Novoselic is on
the board of Music for America, an organization working to boost voter
participation among young people.